Effects of probiotic supplements on insulin resistance in gestational diabetes mellitus: A double‐blind randomized controlled trial

Kijmanawat, Athasit; Panburana, Panyu; Reutrakul, Sirimon; Tangshewinsirikul, Chayada

doi:10.1111/jdi.12863

Cited by 120 publications

(114 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

110

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We identified 1934 records, from which we selected 986 individual abstracts and 161 potentially relevant articles for full review (figure 1). We identified 105 articles19 25–128 reporting data from 99 different research studies including 111 different randomised comparisons of probiotics versus control (further called randomised clinical trials [RCTs], see online supplementary table 1-2) with the following outcomes: BW (number of RCTs: k=58, n=3422 individuals, median=77.4 kg), BMI (k=68, n=4015, 28.2 kg/m²), WC (k=26, n=1583, 98.8 cm); BFM (k=27, n=1562, 27.8 kg), SAT and VAT (k=5, n=543, 192.4 cm² and 114.7 cm², respectively), FG (k=83, n=5188, 6.1 mmol), HbA 1c (k=28, n=1796, 6.3%), INS (k=63, n=3854, 11.0 mU/L), HOMA-IR (k=52, n=3513, 3.2), CRP (k=41, n=2376, 3.6 mg/L), TG (k=74, n=4461, 145.4 mg/dL), ALAT (k=26, n=1466, 38.6 IU/L), ASAT (k=23, n=1340, 36.1 IU/L) and GGT (k=14, n=816, 41.5 IU/L). The median duration of the follow-up was 8 weeks (range: 2–28 weeks), probiotics dose ranged from 10 7 to 10 12 CFU daily, and 43 trials were conducted in one country (Iran).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of bacterial probiotics on obesity, diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease related variables: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo systematically review the effect of oral intake of bacterial probiotics on 15 variables related to obesity, diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMedline, EMBASE and COCHRANE from 1990 to June 2018.Eligibility criteriaRandomised controlled trials (≥14 days) excluding hypercholesterolaemia, alcoholic liver disease, polycystic ovary syndrome and children <3 years.ResultsOne hundred and five articles met inclusion criteria, representing 6826 subjects. In overweight but not obese subjects, probiotics induced improvements in: body weight (k=25 trials, d=−0.94 kg mean difference, 95% CI −1.17 to −0.70, I²=0.0%), body mass index (k=32, d=−0.55 kg/m², 95% CI −0.86 to −0.23, I²=91.9%), waist circumference (k=13, d=−1.31 cm, 95% CI −1.79 to −0.83, I²=14.5%), body fat mass (k=11, d=−0.96 kg, 95% CI −1.21 to −0.71, I²=0.0%) and visceral adipose tissue mass (k=5, d=−6.30 cm², 95% CI −9.05 to −3.56, I²=0.0%). In type 2 diabetics, probiotics reduced fasting glucose (k=19, d=−0.66 mmol/L, 95% CI −1.00 to −0.31, I²=27.7%), glycated haemoglobin (k=13, d=−0.28 pp, 95% CI −0.46 to −0.11, I²=54.1%), insulin (k=13, d=−1.66 mU/L, 95% CI −2.70 to −0.61, I²=37.8%) and homeostatic model of insulin resistance (k=10, d=−1.05 pp, 95% CI −1.48 to −0.61, I²=18.2%). In subjects with fatty liver diseases, probiotics reduced alanine (k=12, d=−10.2 U/L, 95% CI −14.3 to −6.0, I²=93.50%) and aspartate aminotransferases (k=10, d=−9.9 U/L, 95% CI −14.1 to -5.8, I²=96.1%). These improvements were mostly observed with bifidobacteria (Bifidobacterium breve, B. longum), Streptococcus salivarius subsp. thermophilus and lactobacilli (Lactobacillus acidophilus, L. casei, L. delbrueckii) containing mixtures and influenced by trials conducted in one country.ConclusionsThe intake of probiotics resulted in minor but consistent improvements in several metabolic risk factors in subjects with metabolic diseases.Trial registration numberCRD42016033273.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of bacterial probiotics on obesity, diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease related variables: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After reading the titles and abstracts, 54 studies were selected for further review. Finally, thirteen studies met our inclusion criteria [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34]. The detailed process of the search strategy is described in Figure 1.…”

Section: Study Selection and Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Figure 2 shows the risk of bias of the included studies. Twelve studies [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][31][32][33][34] reported methods for generating random sequences, which were mainly computerized randomization methods. Seven studies mentioned the use of allocation concealment, and three of these studies described specific methods [25,27,29].…”

Section: Study Selection and Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Nutritional Strategies on Glucose Homeostasis in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Jin

Sha

Dong

et al. 2020

Journal of Diabetes Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is one of the most common complications of pregnancy, and nutritional therapy is the basis of GDM treatment. However, the effects of different forms of nutritional supplementation on improving gestational diabetes are uncertain. Objective. We conducted a network meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of supplementation with different nutrients on glucose metabolism in women with GDM. Methods. We conducted a literature search using PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the differences between different nutritional strategies in women with GDM. The Cochrane tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were used to compare and rank the effects of nutritional strategies for the improvement of fasting plasma glucose (FPG), serum insulin, and homeostasis model assessment-insulin resistance (HOMA-IR). Results. We included thirteen RCTs with a total of 754 participants. Compared with placebo, omega-3, magnesium, vitamin D, zinc, and probiotics were more beneficial for improving FPG, serum insulin, and HOMA-IR. Network analysis showed that vitamin D supplementation was superior to omega-3 (-3.64 mg/dL, 95% CI: -5.77 to -1.51), zinc (-5.71 mg/dL, 95% CI: -10.19 to -1.23), probiotics (-6.76 mg/dL, 95% CI: -10.02 to -3.50), and placebo (-12.13 mg/dL, 95% CI: -14.55 to -9.70) for improving FPG. Magnesium supplementation was more beneficial for decreasing serum insulin compared with probiotics (-5.10 μIU/mL, 95% CI: -9.32 to -0.88) and placebo (-7.80 μIU/mL; 95% CI-11.95, -3.65). Vitamin D was more effective than probiotics (-0.99, 95% CI: -1.84 to -0.14) and placebo (-1.80, 95% CI: -2.45 to -1.16) for improving HOMA-IR. Conclusion. Vitamin D supplementation significantly reduced FPG and regulated HOMA-IR. Magnesium supplementation was superior in decreasing serum insulin than supplementation with other nutrients. Nutrient supplementation seemed to have an effect on glucose homeostasis maintenance in patients with GDM and may be considered an adjunctive therapy.

show abstract

“…ere was no change in weight gain between the groups. e results disclosed that the supplementation of probiotic could improve glycemic control in GDM patients [35].…”

Section: Probiotic Supplementmentioning

confidence: 94%

Do Probiotics Improve the Health Status of Individuals with Diabetes Mellitus? A Review on Outcomes of Clinical Trials

Kesika

Sivamaruthi

Chaiyasut

2019

BioMed Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Probiotics are now considered as an adjuvant and complementary therapeutic agent for several health complications, especially for metabolic and gastrointestinal disorders because of the influential impact of probiotic consumption on gut microbiota and immunity. Diabetes mellitus (DM) is fourth, in noncommunicable disease category, leading cause of mortality, morbidity, and economic crises in the world. Though several progressions are added in the medical field in recent decades, the treatment and management of diabetic-related health issues are still challenging. The present study summarizes the effects of probiotic supplementation on the health status of diabetic patients. The relevant information was collected from Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar. The detailed literature survey revealed that the consumption of probiotic supplementation significantly improved the overall health condition of diabetic patients. Especially, the probiotic intervention improved the fasting blood glucose, insulin sensitivity, and systemic inflammatory and antioxidant status in type 2 diabetic (T2D) patients. Moreover, improvement of gut microbial composition and prevention of bacterial translocation has also been observed in probiotic-supplemented T2D people. Some of the studies evidenced that the supplementation of probiotics can prevent and improve the gestational DM. Nevertheless, some of the studies reported negative results and limitations in the results of clinical trials. However, further studies are mandatory to develop a concrete probiotic-based adjuvant treatment procedure to treat DM.

show abstract

Effects of probiotic supplements on insulin resistance in gestational diabetes mellitus: A double‐blind randomized controlled trial

Cited by 120 publications

References 45 publications

Impact of bacterial probiotics on obesity, diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease related variables: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Impact of bacterial probiotics on obesity, diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease related variables: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Effects of Nutritional Strategies on Glucose Homeostasis in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Do Probiotics Improve the Health Status of Individuals with Diabetes Mellitus? A Review on Outcomes of Clinical Trials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About